LIM N/V FI codes?

[buzzlightyear]

Because you can't see it, so N/V.

Really .not just another dollar in there bank account

The book is a Guide, very help full if you don't understand how thing work.

 

[Cables]

Regardless of whether you can gain access to certain parts of the circuit is irrelevant, if the ocpd is rated more than the conductor size then its a c2 .either one is an unsatisfactory report , as in further investigation .a locked room could be a commercial kitchen pantry .lots of current flowing thru 2 legs of a radial 2.5 mm circuit protected by say a c32amp mcb

Although I agree, an OCPD should not be rated higher than the conductor size, it may not warrant a C2.
Let’s say a 3amp switched fuse at a boiler 2.5mm, 32amp OCPD, single circuit.
Overload would not be possible on the cable so would not warrant a C2.
Or a 1.5mm spur of a ring circuit, same scenario.

Certainly not what you would do, but acceptable should it be found.

 

[Tom256]

In your given example of a 1.5mm spur off a ring circuit. This is not ok unless via a fused spur as overload is indeed possible.

Overload protection is required (Shall requirement) at the point a reduction of the current carrying capacity of conductors occurs EXCEPT where 433.2.2 applies.

Although I agree, an OCPD should not be rated higher than the conductor size

There are still checks and balances at play. The calculation for cable size where overload protection is not required is based on Ib (design current) and would be considered accordingly. In these circumstances the cable rating [as installed] must exceed the load yet may not neccessarily exceed the rating of the overcurrent device. It could therefore be higher and 'should not' is not relevant. This would need to be determined as part of the calculations associated with the inspection should there be reason for concern.
As a part of this the adiabatic check within regulation 434.5.2 is applied as it would be for the cpc

 

[Cables]

In your given example of a 1.5mm spur off a ring circuit. This is not ok unless via a fused spur as overload is indeed possible.

By my use of words “Same Scenario” meant, a 1.5 spur from a 32amp circuit (ring) via a switched fuse, maybe should have made that clearer.

 

[ppelec100]

50 percent .that's a can of worms .what would you charge for that considering your inspecting half the installation. Let the customer decide its there property .let's say its a big house and there are no grommets on metal ko boxes ,that's a days remedial work on old lathe and plaster .that's possibly 30 downlights to remove from ceiling and sort basic insulation wrongly terminated into down light ..termination of cpc at extractor fan assuming there's more than 1 .digging out sockets or switch plates damaging walls to check terminations .pulling out expensive appliances like double ovens ,hobs ,drawer packs to get to elephants bottom ,dissmantling integrated kitchen appliances like fridges ,washing machines .I realise if there is an over counter isolator then other options are available. I guess you would have a long list of extent and limitations of inspection and testing with an agreement from customer and the reason .I guess you issue report to client but they will want you to sort any defects if anything fails the report .I myself like nothing better than removing metal boxes from walls and inserting grommets ,bursting the wall as I go x half the installation..maybe have an understanding with client of how much you are inspecting .testing takes care of itself ,your testing every circuit but quantity of inspection I would agree with client beforehand.and why just sockets on thread .I have white things on my wall quite high up that seem to operate lights .I also have isolators in my kitchen that switch off things like hobs and ovens and of course I have an immersion tank that if I was completing an eicr the flex at immersion head would be one of the first things I checked .I certainly wouldn't dissmantle 40 sockets lol checking for a loose connection. Is that not why we have mft,s .

thanks for the reply, i agree with what youre saying so how would you go about wording this for the cost side of things before the eicr? something like a sample will be set out and if they are good then no further sampling but if they are bad /unsatisfactory then i will need to investigate further another time or there and then if you got the time but for extra hourly charge? (obviously not exactly worded like that lol but something along those lines)